From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Alexey Zaytsev" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel IXP4xx network drivers v.2 - Ethernet and HSS Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 12:48:51 +0400 Message-ID: References: <464034CF.20700@wpkg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Michael Jones" , "Krzysztof Halasa" To: "Tomasz Chmielewski" Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.228]:5067 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934714AbXEHIsx (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 May 2007 04:48:53 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 76so1891506wra for ; Tue, 08 May 2007 01:48:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <464034CF.20700@wpkg.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 5/8/07, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote: > Michael Jones wrote: > > >> +#ifndef __ARMEB__ > >> +#warning Little endian mode not supported > >> +#endif > > > > Personally I'm less fussed about WAN / LE support. Anyone with any > > sense will run ixp4xx boards doing such a specialised network > > operation as BE. Also, NSLU2-Linux can't test this functionality with > > our LE setup as we don't have this hardware on-board. You may just > > want to declare a depends on ARMEB in Kconfig (with or without OR > > (ARM || BROKEN) ) and have done with it - it's up to you. > > Christian Hohnstaedt's work did support LE though. > > Not all ixp4xx boards are by definition "doing such a specialised > network operation". > I was always curious, why do people want to run ixp4xx in LE mode? What are the benefits that overweight the obvious performance degradation?